Law & Society Final

According to the scholars we have read, how can we think about the relationship between shared norms and crime?

Durkheim believed that law reflected the collective consciousness (the moral values and ideals upheld by members of society in their actions) and that actions are criminalized or considered deviant because they violated social mores. it is a crime bc we condemn it not because it is a crime. if it misaligns with societal perception then it’s criminal.

Explain “governing through crime”

This refers to Simon criminalization of certain activities with the intention to achieve justice and reinforce agendas or ideals held by authorizing members of society or predominant social groups. It promotes other motivations of politicians.

• Example of this is the War on Drugs because while black people were not statistically the highest users of drugs, the criminalization and targeting of drug use and possession in predominantly black communities then became a justification for overpricing and mass incarceration.

How are laws enforced?

• Private Civil lawsuit

  • Injured party makes decision to enforce and pays for enforcement

  • enforcement happens after the injury occurs

  • if enforcement succeeds then the defendant is determined liable for damages and then has to compensate the plaintiff money damages

  • there are many hurdles that exist

• Government civil lawsuit

  • The government makes decision to enforce and pays for enforcement

  • enforcement happens after injury occurs

  • if enforcement succeeds then the government receives money from defendant (civil penalties)

    • settlements, injunctive relief (court may order party to stop illegal actions or compel them to do specific things (employment discrimination cases, housing discrimination, police misconduct etc), defendant may be required to pay compensatory damages for injuries

  • a lot of hurdles exist

• Regulatory enfrocement

  • government makes decision to enforce and pays

  • enforcement can happen before or after injury

  • if enforcement succeeds, then there is an order to change behavior, and government receives funds from defendants’s fine/civil penalties

  • a lot of hurdles exist

• Criminal Prosecution

  • Government enforces and pays for enforcement

  • enforcement happens after injury

  • if enforcement succeeds => criminal sanctions (fines, prison, criminal record)

  • a lot of hurdles exist

    • government giving full power city, state, federal against a single person or entity => power is unbalanced

Who makes up law enforcement in the US?

• Police officers

  • organized by military-style chain of command (chiefs, captains, sergeant, officers)

  • structured by jurisdiction: local (city/town), county (sheriff), state police

What do law enforcement officers do?

• A part of their job is to be proactive & reactive

  • reactive

    • generally low-level matters

    • they respond to citizens’ complaints usually low-level matters

  • proactive

    • routine patrolling

      • police usually open their time patrolling around city and handle low level things like parking tickets, speeding, etc

    • specialized targets

    • focus on an event that may happen

    • sometimes they are actually devoted to more serious crimes

    • only a small portion of their time is spent facing dangerous circumstances and accessing crime scenes

What does their training look like?

Police officers only need 652 hours of basic training and 560 hours in Illinois which is way less compared to officers in other countries require thousands of hours of training.

ex: in Portugal 10,000 hours for officer training

How is policing discretionary?

• Police can pull someone over and investigate them if they have “reasonable suspicions,” that criminal activity is happening.

• they can even arrest someone if they have “probable cause” to believe a crime has been/is being/is about to be committed (often a hunch)

• but that phrase is extremely vague and subjective on that officer’s perceptions and notions toward specific identities and body language

  • what may be reasonable to one officer could be unreasonable to another

  • they can make these decisions in the field without instant reprimand or consulting from other supervisors or officers which can enable officers to weaponize their authority to discriminate against minorities.

    • Ie:

      • vagrancy laws were used by officers as an excuse to continually oppresss black people to reinforce segregationist ideals

      • Sodomy laws in podcast where two men weren’t breaking laws but the officer thought they were gay and wanted to arrest them bc their potential identity did not align with the officer

Why is there discretion in the system?

• Some discretion is present because of language of laws and roles of police officers that don't tell them specifically when they can enforce certain things

• there is also discretion in amounts of resources allocated to different departments, which can introduce disparities in policing

• some discretion in individual officers

Who are we talking about when we mention prosecutors?

• lawyers

Who do they serve?

• they serve public intent in justice; justice not conviction

  • represent the government and public safety

What do prosecutors do? what role does discretion play in their jobs?

• They determine whether to prosecute, and which charges (if any) to pursue; they often take cases they think they can win.

How do they get these jobs?

• Federal US attorneys appointed by president

• State level prosecutors can be appointed or elected

  • assistant US attorneys are hired through civil serve process

  • district attorneys or low level prosecutors hired through normal processes

what is the process of prosecution?

• police arrest suspect

• short summary of next steps: prosecutors review evidence, file charges, initiate court processes

  • determine whether to issue charge but depends on degree of crime

    • misdemeanor or less serious charge means prosecutor may be able to file charge without grand jury

    • felony/more serious charge requires prosecutor to ask grand jury to return an indictment, which means grand jury approves the charges (depends on state bc they’re 50/50)

    • prosecutors presents evidence to grand jury

    • gj decides whether here is probable cause (evident) to believe person committed a crime

    • if they are then they approve the charges/return the indictment to the court (submitted written charges that allow prosecutor to proceed)

• once charges are filed, defendant is arraigned on charges (first formal appearance usually within 24-48 hours of arrest)

  • indictment or charges are read

  • defendant pleads guilty, not guilty, no contest

• trial or guilty plea

• verdict (when petit jury is involved they usually decide verdict while grand jury issues indictment)

What is the Grand Jury?

• 16-23 people

• used before serious charges (can be issued by government)

• determines whether there is probable case to indict an individual or entity who committed a crime using prosecution evidence; no unanimity required

• jurors CAN question witnesses

• they sit from 1 day to several months hearing multiple cases

• deliberations are secret

• they can indict the person

What is the petit jury?

• 12 in criminal case

• They are used at trial

• determines verdict of case (guilty or innocent)

• they get evidence by hearing both sides (adversarial)

• they CANNOT question witnesses

• they sit for 1 trial

• unanimity IS REQUIRED

• deliberations are secret

• ie: Jury decision but be unanimous (everyone must agree) until 2020 when Supreme Court struck down practice

  • OR and LA had previously allowed nonunanimougs judgement

What is Bail?

• The money defendants post with the court to ensure that they will return to court (not a fine or punishment, it’s just a way to ensure return)

What happens at a bail hearing?

• The judge either sets a bail amount, released the defendant without bail, or denies bail

What are some concerns with how bail works? What are proposed reforms?

• Some people cannot afford bail amount, while some can easily afford release

• Reforms to address this include

  • have affordable bail

  • eliminate cash bail

    • cashless bail allows judges to base release on flight risk and safety instead of finances

  • use other forms of remaining people to go back to court

  • use bail funds

    • organizations raise money for posting bail for people in jail on pre-trial detention who could not afford it on their own.

define pretrial detention, and discuss why so many people are in jail.

• detaining of legally innocent people as they await their trials

  • so many people are in jail because they probably cannot afford bail amounts to secure their release

  • people can also be a flight risk so they are locked up in jial

  • most people in jail are not convicted but are awaiting trial

What is plea bargaining?

• A negotiation tactic between prosecutors and defense in a criminal case where the defendant to plead guilty or “no contest” to some of or all of the charges against them in exchange for a mitigated sentence, reduced charges, or dismissal of other charges.

• 94-98% of cases end with pleading out while in the 80s it was 20%

What are the advantages and disadvantages of Plea Bargaining for prosecutors and defendants?

• Prosecutor

  • Saves costs and energy of going to trial (allows prosecutor to manage more cases)

  • Plea Bargains from some defendants help prosecutors build bigger case against other defendants

  • has more information than judge about facts when it comes to PBs

• Defendant

  • pros

    • can save resources (costs and energy of going to trial)

      • if you’re paying for your own attorney, you’re paying for less hours hours

      • looming trial can affect life => makes you more inclined to get rid of charges and move on

    • defendants can bargain for lower sentence

    • if you’re already in jail, you can plead guilty for time spent and then do service

  • cons

    • goals of punishment (retribution, deterrence, etc) can be questionable

    • might face charges higher than initial ones

    • few procedural protections without judge presence

    • bargaining power can be disparaged by race, legal consciousness, resources, etc

    • may incentive innocent to plead guilty

What kinds of checks exist in prosecutorial discretion?

Juries (Grand/Petit Juries)

Explain what happens once charges are filed against someone

• Individual becomes a defendant and is either arrested or summoned to court

What does a defense attorney do?

• Ensures defendant 6th amendment: “right to a speedy, public trial”

What are some proposed reforms?

• More restrictions on/supervision of prosecutors

• More procedural protections during plea negotiations

• More judicial involvement

• Take all cases to trial 

When are Civil Trials used?

They are used to resolve disputes, harm to private parties. One party sues another

What happens between filing a complaint or charges and trial in civil trials?

The discovery process occurs where parties exchange evidence.

Do civil trials have to go actually go to trial?

No, bc the plaintiff and defendant might agree to settle the case on a mutually agreed upon terms (not always equal)

What does a civil trial decide?

Whether the defendant is liable or not

What is the burden of proof for the decider (judge or jury)?

Preponderance of the evidence. (examined with opposing evidence to determine its validity; must be more than 50 percent)

What happens next in a Civil trial?

Trial OR settlement on mutual grounds; after that losing party can appeal on the grounds that there were legal errors in trial

When are criminal trials used?

When someone is a harm to society or the public at large, or government prosecutor is trying to criminally convict a defendant.

what happens between filing a compliant or charges and trial in a criminal trial?

Discovery process — parties exchange evidence although it’s mostly prosecution giving its evidence to defendant

do criminal trials have to go to trial?

No, prosecutor and defendant might agree on terms for defendant to plead guilty in exchange for reduced charges or sentnece

What does the trial decide?

guilt or innocence

What is the burden of proof for the decider (judge or jury) in a criminal trial?

guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. You cannot put a numeric value on this charge, so a reasonable person couldn’t doubt that the defendant is guilty because their guilt is unequivocal. But if the judge or jury does not believe the prosecution proved the person’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, then they can acquit the defendant or determine them “not guilty”

What happens after a criminal trial?

The defendant can appeal conviction on the grounds of legal errors at trial; persecutors CANNOT appeal acquittal

What are the advantages and disadvantages of civil case settlements

• saves costs and energy of going to trial

• defendant can bargain for lower financial penalty than at trial

• - might settle bc of economic incentives, not truth of underlying claim

• - bargaining power may not be at all equal

• - RP’s leverage money, resources and legal knowledge, often coercing individual OS’' to capitulate

Why do we use juries rather than only professionally trained judges?

Like representative legislatures & grand juries, petit juries are another place for popular representation/a popular check on the enforcement of law by bringing in people who have legal consciousness that may differ from their legally professional counterparts

What is jury nullification?

The jury decides that the defendant is not guilty. they could believe the person broke the law, but they nullify because they don’t agree with the type or severity of the charge. maybe to them it is unfitting or unjust.

• Ie; nullification for minor drug offenses; 1760s, colonists used nullification to keep Americans out of jail for smuggling.

Who can serve on juries, and how/why has this changed over time?

• must be a citizen, 18 years or older

• cannot be a felon

• historically, excluded women and had hurdles for POC - juries were largely occupied by white men

• eventually SC case declared exclusion based on race and sex was unconstitutional

  • Strauder v. West Virginia (1880) - determined that states can’t bar black men from serving on juries

  • Taylor v. Louisiana (1975) - SC determined states couldn’t bar women

How do scholars think about the legal consciousness of jurors?

• it’s based on the jurors’ own experiences with the law, lawyers, law enforcement, courts, & crime

• People’s thoughts and beliefs about the law are often influenced by popular culture and news coverage.

  • Cultivation theory - media and tv shapes our reality

What is the cultivation theory?

• the sociological idea that media & tv shapes our reality and perception of society

  • and ergo our legal consciousness

  • extended exposure to tv violence and crime shapes viewer’s perceptions of how much violence and crime occurs in the real world

  • It also shapes our understanding of how much crime there is, where that crime is located, and who’s at fault for this violation of collective consciousness

  • ie: when news is dramatized and hyper focused on black theft and assault it shapes their perception of black people

  • shows like criminal minds; law and order; etc

    • suggests that violent crimes and murders occur frequnelty

    • cat men of color as suspects and white people as victims and police

    • prime the viewer to sympathize with enforcement

    • suggests that police are very effective at apprehending the right perpetrator (not true)b

    • suggests that forensic science s accurate and reliable

      • portrays it was readily available and constantly used when it is not scientific; it’s just pattern matching and is very unreliable; CSIs have little training to do this

How are jurors selected?

They are selected Voir Dire — The process in a trial where potential jurors are questioned by attorneys and judges to determine whether they can be fair and impartial

What is the difference between for-cause and peremptory challenges?

• for-cause challenge

  • request by attorney during voir dire to disquslify potential juror for specific reasons, such as they cannot be impartial, has conflict of interest with one or both parties, prior knowledge that would prevent impartiality in examining evidence presented in court, obvious prejudice, are legally incapable of serving, etc => judge has final say on dismissal

• Peremptory challenges

  • excludes/eliminates a potential juror without reason or explanation

    • conflict like watching too much law and order, they seem off, gut-feeling

    • EXCEPT!: Lawyers can’t strike jurors on basis of race, sex, or ethnicity (Batson v. Kentucky where equal protection clause (guarantees that state will not exclude members of defendant’s race from the jury on account of race or false assumptions that members of defendent’s race are unqualified to serve as jurors; JEB v. Alabama determined that the same goes for gender)

What do we know about how jurors make decisions?

• they use front, back, and off stage observations

  • front: what’s happening right in front of the jury, whoever is being called on to speak

  • back: bound from perception. dressing room, in the wings, you’re not actively performing for an audience

  • off stage: legal actors when they are not speaking in front of the court room

• juries are supposed to use front stage observations to inform deliberations. offstage comments and expressions are considered but aren’t important for outcome of case

What is the “no impeachment rule?”

• protects secrecy and integrity of what is discussed within a jury; once a jury reaches a verdict, people cannot question jurors about their private discussion in an attempt to try and overturn the verdict (unless egregious and unmistakably dependent on racial bias, but some racial comments can pass )

What’s the relationship between juries and the death penalty?

• Juries decide guilt and sentence; they typically decide whether death penalty will be considered for the case (unanimously) but Judge makes final decision

• death qualified juries - excludes anyone who says they would never or would always impose the death penalty

Why do we punish?

• Retribution - if you break a law or do something “bad,” then something bad should happen to you. suffer for your actions

  • (we don’t want victims of crimes taking retribution into their own hands, so we want mental state to it, which legitimizes people seeing remedy or consequences)

• Restitution - If defendant breaks a law or does something “bad,” they have to reimburse victim for harm

  • stolen money is given back to

  • damage to property, plaintiff receives money to restore

  • Civil libration: fines and restitution is how we return to the status quo

• Incapacitation: take them out of society through house arrest, death penalty, incarceration

  • this person can’t safely live in society (danger to public), so they will be removed to prevent potential harm

• Deterrence

  • specific deterrence: using fines or punishments to prevent particular person who offended from doing it again

    • speeding tickets, drunk driver losing license, company fined in violating environment regulations will not do it agian

  • general deterrence

    • broader idea that if you other people see someone get a punishment, they will be less inclined to do that same ting

      • I don’t want to get in trouble like him so i’m not gonna do it

How do we punish?

• Shaming

  • incapacitated for short period but enough time for public humiliation to make perpetrator improve and makes statement to members of society

  • deterrence

• Fine

  • restitutive/deterrence

• Incarceration

  • Mass incarceration

  • (incapacitation; no rehabilitation)

  • jail time/punishmnet. mainly allows criminal to serve their time before re-entering society

    • ie:

    • 20 percent of incarcerated people arrested fro drug offenses (most for drug possession)

    • war on drugs: raising punishments for crime, no tolerance policing, more incarceration

    • half of incarcerated people by federal system were incarcerated for drug addicitions

• Probation & Parole

  • rehabilitation

  • Probation

    • offenders who is convicted of offense but their prison sentence is suspended. They serve sentence in the community usually for less serious offenses

  • parole

    • conditional release after serving time in prison. They were once incarcerated but were released early by court imposed expiration date. Now serve time in community

  • terms are strict, with deadline that is determined by judge who can either extend or shorten it depending on whether they think you are constantly obeying the law. Can easily be sent back

  • meet with parole officers, find housing, pursue job, drug tests, employment, etc

• Death penalty

  • incapacitation

  • Most extreme punishment bc it uses death as a punishment for crime

  • history of racism when using this penalty bc jury pool was usually all white

  • you can’t rule death penalty on a minor

What are collateral consequences?

• limitations/restrictions that can be imposed on individuals with a criminal conviction that are separate from their actual sentence

  • right to vote, issues getting employment, could lose custody, issues accessing public housing, can’t be a juror

What are three factors in deterrence analysis?

• Severity: how severe are the punishments?

  • studies show harsher penalties don’t necessarily deter crimes; juveniles who are tried under adult standards are more likely to repeat crimes

• certainty: how likely is it?

  • parking tickets: Evanston parking tickets are low but aggressive, while Chicago’s are higher but less likely to get ticketed

  • if police are staring at this corner, people are not going to conduct transactions bc they’ll get caught

• Celerity: how quickly will it happen

why is deterrence difficult to study?

• it assumes that people are able to accurately know and weigh costs and benefits of deterrence

  • there is gap between formal law (in the books) and actual practice

    • people don’t obey law 100% of the time

    • some people have an incomplete understanding of the law and don’t know they’re actively breaking it (sports betting pools)

When and why do morality and the law line up

• Law reflects the societal consensus of moral judgments

  • This immoral act is also illegal—so my morality matches the law

  • Durkheim: crimes are acts which seriously violate a society’s shared norms

  • Stealing my roommates’s money is wrong, or I don’t want to murder bc it’s wrong

• law teaches you that illegal things are immoral

  • Since law makes this act illegal, i believe that this act is immoral, so my morality matches the law

• Following the law is considered the moral thing to do

  • Law makes this act illegal, and I think it’s immoral to do illegal things–so my morality matches the law

What if law and morality do not line up?

• People might think the law is unjust and disobey the law

• people might try to change the law through litigation or legislation

• ie: segregation, sodomy, vagrancy laws

What if legal process and the law don’t line up?

• People might lose trust in the legal system and are more likely to disobey the law

  • MLK letter from Birmingham

    • “A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law, or the law of God…An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.”

  • “An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal and natural law. any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statues are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality

what is civil disobedience?

the active refusal to obey certain laws that people see as unjust or unnecessary.

How does a bill become a law?

• starts with an idea; contact elected officials to share idea. if they like the law, they can write the bill

• bill is introduced in house or senate by a sponsor

  • Bills are placed in wooden box called “the hopper” when bills are introduced to House of reps

• Bill goes to committee

  • representatives or senators meet in a small group to research, discuss, and make changes to the bill.

  • vote to accept or reject the bill and its changes before sending it to the house or senate floor for debate OR to subcommittee for research

• Congress Debates and Votes

  • Members of House or senate can now debate bill and prose changes/amendments before voting

  • if majority votes to pass bill, it moves to the other house to go through a similar process of committees, debates, and voting

  • Both houses have to agree on same version of final bill before it goes to president

• Presidential action

  • when bill gets to president they can

    • approve and pass

    • veto - rejects bill and returns it to congress iwht reaons for veto. congress can override veto with 2/3 vote of house and senate and bill becomes law

    • Choose no action - president can do nothing . If congress is in session 10 days after no answer, then bill automatically becomes law

    • Pocket Veto - If congress adjourns (goes out of session) within 10 dy period after president receives bill, president can choose not to sign it and the bill will not become law

What are the steps involved in solving social problems through legislation?

1. constructing the social problem:

   1. political-legal entrepreneur frames an issue

   2. media magnifies issues

   3. professional interest groups weigh in

   4. parties link issue to broader societal conflict

   5. parties identify someone or something as culpable

   6. parties make claims of causation

2. Legislators identify social problem

3. they and staff gather information

4. they come up with potential solution and draft a bill

What are the steps involved in solving social problems through litigation?

• “Cause lawyering”; pursues strategic for social change through litigation with specific clients

• find a “perfect plaintiff”

  • “test case”

  • courts require an actual case/controversy so it has to be an active dispute/case

  • you need to have a plaintiff who is wiling to go all the way without pleas or settlements bc you need to try to go to the supreme court

• Figure out conditions around case (what law is violating, what is the plaintiff’s story and reason)

• The goal is to get to the Supreme Court, but oftentimes unrealisitc

• must overcome hurdles of ‘stare decisis’

  • the SC’s decisions stand from past cases

  • they don’t want to overrule themselves and substantively apply their jurisdiction because it looks bad and delegitimizes theyr reputation, makes system inconsistent

What nuance have sociolegal scholars added to this process? (i.e how is this process more complicated than School House Rock’s Bill on Capitol Hill?)

• They consider how broad or narrow the language should be in the Bill

• what kind of enforcement

• where they want this law to be passed

• Law and social change is reciprocal - shifts in. law can shift legal consciousness and then society and vice versa

How do various players construct and frame social problems?

• Courts: interpret broad constitutional language (due process, legal protection, forms of enforcement) which changes the law

• cause lawyers change a grievance into a legal question, attempting to present the issue in a favorable light

• social movements start where the inequalities are most pronounced and impactful on people’s every day lives (ie: NAACP south segregation; Roe V Wade), then works its way broader and broader to generalize the situation.

what should we consider when drafting a bill?

• support, popularity, or significance the movement or idea has, is it possible to garner legislators; support for potential bill

  • consider hegemonic values in society => shapes our reality of what we can and can’t do, what’s normal or unusual

    • drunk driving

    • smoking indoors to being banned

    • same sex marriage

• timing of the bill relative to media perception and things occurring in society; past decisions of SC

• legislatures are proactive but is up to them to decide what to do. Go to legislature and say you should do something about this, you might just get a letter saying that they noted your concern but won’t proceed

What mechanisms exist for enforcing a law?

• Retribution, restitution, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and deterrence

list some examples of social problems tackled through legislation.

Civil Rights Act of 1964, Voting Rights Act (1965), Elementary and Secondary Act (1965),

Which groups played which roles in constructing the issue? How?

• NAACP constructed the issue of segregation in education, voting, public spaces, housing, and transportation as a violation of the 14th amendment equal protections clause

• Brown V. Board => effects on kids psychologically

How does Supreme Court change the law?

Issuing rulings that are then enforced by executive or congress; and then matriculate into the lower courts nationally

what are the advantages and disadvantages of legislation?

• Advantages

  • proactive—-can consider wide set of issues, craft wide set of remedies

• disadvantages

  • can ignore you—which is likely if small movement or pushing unpopular issue

  • depending on the issue, you may have to lobby 50 different state legislatures

  • some congress can handle and others states handles if things happen in state boundaries => usually state ; if they cross state border, then legislation or congres

What are the advantages and disadvantages of law change through. litigation?

• advantages

  • : reactive —-court must hear your case if it is active

    • Supreme court has a lot of discretion to alter the meaning of existing law

    • A supreme court opinion applies across the country (and you really only need 5 votes)

  • can push through unfavorable legislation and enact nationwide reform

• Disadvantages 

  • losing test cases can become precedent against the cause

  • process is very slow comparatively

  • enforcement may not occur or may be applied unevenly

  • many opportune for case to break along the way

  • Need an active dispute to go to court

    • Must be active legal dispute - taking issue with existing law

  • For maximum effect, you need to go to the Supreme Court - but the Court only takes the cases it wants to take

  • You never know what the court might do

What challenges might litigants face on the way to the Supreme Court?

Not being able to go all the way to SC (cycle of cases and appeals), due to lack of resources or being struck down in lower courts, and Supreme Court chooses not to grant cert,

What outcomes are possible once the Court hears a case?

upholding or reversal; however, the ‘law’ is interpreted, nationalized, and therefore standardized.

What steps did NAACP take to change segregation laws?

• Public used peaceful demonstrations, sit-ins, boycotts, coordinated test cases to make cases for SC like Plessy V. Ferguson

• they went slowly, starting with graduate/professional schools and telling them to enforce Plessy v. Ferguson first

  • Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) - Supreme Court held that segregation didn’t violate the Constitution (Facilities could be separate as long as they were equal)

• separate but equal instead of separate = unequal

• Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and then Brown II

• transportation: Bailey v. Patterson and the development of ICC

• Public spaces: coordinated sit-ins in private restaurants and hotels which led to court cases testing the constitutionality of segregation

• Housing: Shelley v. Kramer, Reitman v. Mulkey, Jones v. Mayer CO, and in 1968, the Supreme Court firmly supported open housing

How did the NAACP legal fund impact cause lawyering?

• it created a model of public interest that set precedence for successful execution of cause lawyering

  • Title VII Civil Rights Act bars sex discrimination with employment

    • Through litigation, SC has held that sex discrimination includes Sexual harassment and discrimination on basis of sexual orientation and gender identiy

  • Second amendment jurisprudence

    • through litigation, federalist society lawyers changed constitutional law regarding gunfights (from a collective to an individual right) => some SC justices and members of congress were part of federalist society or the network which influenced their decisions

What do lawyers do?

• representing the legal system to the client

  • serve as repository of legal knowledge for clients

  • translate the law to clients—tell them what to expect

  • offer advice to clients—-encourage them to comply (or evade) the law

  • offer a form of therapy to clients

  • share personal knowledge and connections with clients

• Representing the client to legal system

  • know and follow the appropriate rules

  • represent the client to the other lawyers, judges, other legal institutions

  • translate the client’s story to legal institutions

  • even playing field